You may have noticed already, but some of those rights are quite US specific, which makes it interesting: how many of the people passionately attached to their right to bear arms are also the people who think that the US should be founded on the basis of the Ten Commandments? But it also raises interesting questions about the role of the law: how do you decide whether it's more important to stop people doing bad things than it is to allow them the freedom to make their own mistakes?
Žižek says that the tension between human rights and the ten commandments is rooted in a more fundamental tension between the ten commandments and the injunction to love our neighbour. The ten commandments are all about the rules we have to follow to be acceptable to God and to one another, but loving our neighbour means that we have to love the people around us whether they follow the rules or not, in all their bad, offensive and or disgusting strangeness and sinfulness. 'Love your neighbour' means 'love your neighbour', even if they're an adulterer or a murderer or they covet your ass.
3 comments:
Reminds me a bit of this guy: http://www.futilitycloset.com/2010/04/21/all-gods-creatures/
But seriously, the new covenant injunction to love someone who may not follow the same rules has echoes from the people of God not really getting on with other peoples in the OT.
Isn't this where the new covenant is better, because it departs from rules and the under/not under dualism of a legal system and replaces it with unconditional love? In which case what is the relationship between human rights and the new covenant, rather than the old?
Oi, não sei se você vai entender o que escrevi aqui. adorei seu blog, muito mesmo. Continue assim. beijos
Post a Comment